Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2021 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 691 - SC - Indian LawsImposition of electricity duty and penalty on the electricity - Maintainability of petition - alternate statutory remedy under Section 9A of the Act, present or not - appropriate forum - High Court declined to entertain the writ petition instituted by the appellant on the ground that the dispute between the parties is factual in nature and is suitable for adjudication in terms of the statutory remedy provided in the Bihar Electricity Duty Act 1948, Bihar Electricity Act or the Act - whether dispute involves questions of fact which are not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court? HELD THAT:- While a High Court would normally not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective and efficacious alternate remedy is available, the existence of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction in certain contingencies. This principle has been crystallized by this Court in Whirpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai, [1998 (10) TMI 510 - SUPREME COURT] and Harbanslal Sahni v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, [2002 (12) TMI 564 - SUPREME COURT]. The principle of alternate remedies and its exceptions was also reiterated recently in the decision in Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. M/s Commercial Steel Limited, [2021 (9) TMI 480 - SUPREME COURT] - In State of HP v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd, [2005 (7) TMI 353 - SUPREME COURT] this Court has held that a writ petition is maintainable before the High Court if the taxing authorities have acted beyond the scope of their jurisdiction. It is not the case of the appellant that the respondents have miscalculated the duty and penalty imposed on it. The appellant contends that the State Government does not have the power to levy tax on its sale of electricity to BSEB. Thus, the plea strikes at the exercise of jurisdiction by the Government. In view of the law discussed above on the rule of alternate remedy, the High Court can exercise its writ jurisdiction if the order of the authority is challenged for want of authority and jurisdiction, which is a pure question of law. The issues raised by the appellant are questions of law which require, upon a comprehensive reading of the Bihar Electricity Act, a determination of whether tax can be levied on the supply of electricity by a power generator (which also manufactures sugar) supplying electricity to a distributor; and whether the first respondent has the legislative competence to levy duty on the sale of electricity to an intermediary distributor - The question of whether the appellant is liable to file returns under Sections 6B(1) and 5A of the Act is directly related to the issue of whether the sale of electricity by the appellant to BSEB falls under the charging provisions of Section 3(1). The questions raised by the appellant can be adjudicated without delving into any factual dispute. Thus, the present matter is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The High Court made an error in declining to entertain the writ petition and it would be appropriate to restore the proceedings back to the High Court for a fresh disposal - Application disposed off.
|